Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries
Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Victoria 3 9038 Bug Reports 5231 User Mods 384 Multiplayer 44 Suggestions 2283 Tech Support 529 After Action Reports (AARs)
Previous dev diary Next dev diary
Show only dev responses

Dev Diary #46 - Political Parties

16_9.jpg

​
Good evening! Today we are finally ready to talk in detail about Political Parties. This has been a much-requested feature for Victoria 3, and indeed the political world would feel a little empty without the Whigs and Tories going at each other’s throats. We’ve listened, and some months ago we revealed that we were indeed working on implementing this feature. Today we are ready to talk about how Parties will factor into the political landscape of the game.

In Victoria 3, a Political Party is an alliance between Interest Groups. They appear in countries that have Elections, and are absent in countries without them, differentiating the experience and mechanics of democracies from autocracies. Interest Groups must be added or removed from government as a single bloc, which means that you’ll need to make strategic decisions about the makeup of your government and deal with the consequences. The Liberal Party may for instance contain both the Intelligentsia and the Industrialists, who will both back your plans to move toward a free market economy but diverge on the issue of child labor. Sometimes an opposition Interest Group might decide that it wants to join a Party currently in government (or vice versa) - in this circumstance, the Interest Group will leave their old Party and be marked as “wanting to join” their new party. This won’t force any Interest Group into or out of government, but if you decide to reform your government under these circumstances you must treat that Interest Group as being a member of the new Party, bringing them into or out of government as a single bloc.

The Republican Party in the USA is made up of an alliance between the Industrialists and the Intelligentsia, primarily opposing the ruling Democratic Party which is constituted by the Southern Planters and Petite Bourgeoisie.
uspolitics.png

​
Just as Parties ally together when you form your government, they also share their Momentum in Elections, which determines their votes. If for instance the fascist leader of the Petite Bourgeoisie joins the Conservative Party and is caught up in a political scandal, the whole Party suffers the electoral consequences. On the other hand, as the Landowners begin to lose their political relevance in an increasingly industrialized economy they might cling to relevance by attaching themselves to the rising Fascist Party, who may bring them Political Power from the votes the whole Party gains in the Election.

The Whig Party, consisting of a large number of opposition IG’s, has landed themselves in a corruption scandal. Rowland Hill, leader of the Armed Forces and prominent Reformer, may have seriously harmed the entire bloc’s election campaign.
electionevent.png

​
During the Election Campaign period (which as you’ll recall lasts 6 months before the final votes are cast), you’re likely to get events relating to the various Party’s campaign efforts that can have a major impact on Momentum. These events are inspired by the campaigns and scandals of the period, such as Gladstone’s Midlothian campaign and the whistle-stop tours that became popular in the USA.

There are 11 potential Political Parties that your Interest Groups can join. At any given time, any combination of these parties might exist or not exist. Parties emerge and disband dynamically, so the political landscape can be very different between countries and playthroughs. The following Parties can emerge throughout the course of the game:
  • The Agrarian Party
  • The Anarchist Society
  • The Communist Party
  • The Conservative Party
  • The Fascist Party
  • The Free Trade Party
  • The Liberal Party
  • The Military Party
  • The Radical Party
  • The Religious Party
  • The Social Democratic Party

Many of these parties are aligned primarily around a particular Interest Group’s core ideologies, which other IG’s may join under the right circumstances. The Liberal Party for instance is the natural home of the Intelligentsia due to their Liberal Ideology, but they may be swayed towards other Parties under various circumstances. Other Parties are aligned more strongly with Leader Ideologies that emerge throughout the game, such as the Communist Party and the Radical Party. Each of these Parties has a variety of dynamic names based on national, cultural, and religious factors - for instance in Great Britain the Conservative Party is localized as the Tories, while in the USA they are known as the Democratic Party.

Interest Groups (IG’s) may join a Political Party if they are not Marginalized and if their country has any of the Laws that allow Elections. Which Political Party an Interest Group will join is determined by a wide variety of factors, some of which I’ll list here:
  • IG’s with the Republican, Radical, Market Liberal, or Reformer Leader Ideologies are much more likely to join the Liberal Party
  • The Industrialists are more likely to be drawn towards the Conservative Party if the country has public healthcare or schools, or when voting laws allow the lower strata to vote.
  • Weaker IG’s might join the Agrarian Party alongside the Rural Folk in a push to abolish Serfdom. Scandinavian countries are much more likely to develop an Agrarian Party.
  • In a Council Republic, IG’s led by Anarchist leaders might leave the Communist Party if the country’s ruler is a Vanguardist.
  • When an IG with a Fascist leader becomes powerful, weaker conservative IG’s might join the Fascist Party in a bid to retain their political relevance.
  • If a powerful IG has a Social Democratic leader, weaker leftist IG’s may fall in line behind their more moderate cousins. Likewise, weaker Social Democrats might join a stronger Communist Party.

To summarize: in Victoria 3, Interest Groups band together into Political Parties for the purposes of elections and forming governments. There are many dynamic names and conditions that work to create plausible and flavourful Parties no matter which direction you choose to guide your country.

That’s all for today! Join us next week when Mikael will talk about the mechanics behind Religious Conversion and Cultural Assimilation.
 
Last edited:
  • 209Like
  • 88Love
  • 16
  • 15
  • 12
Reactions:
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
I think a bit more detailed explanation of why I believe that interest groups shouldn't form governments as a bloc.

I like the Interest group system because humans have interests, and when enough of them recognise that they share them, they can use their combined power (clout) to try and implement them. Simple, yet it holds equally true everywhere. Elite interest groups and power brokers exist in every system of government known to man - at the court of the most absolutist monarch and in parliament of the most incorruptible democracies.

I was initially nervous about implementing political parties as a separate mechanic because I believe that political parties naturally flow from this fact, one path for interest groups towards implementing their goals. (I have since grown warmer to the idea as I quite like the implementation of still keeping the interest groups at the forefront while giving people the flavour they desire).

In the game, Interest groups have "clout," which I interpret (and the original Interest group dev diary supports this) as all the power and influence the Interest group can assert in a given society. Clout comes from sheer numbers, but not everyone is equal! Wealthier supporters give more, and national policies boost it further (Aristocrats have more power in a monarchy with feudal levies with hereditary bureaucracy. The devout if there is a state church and the armed forces if there is a professional military etc.). In a democracy, votes matter more, but the armed forces can't just cease having influence in society because no one voted for them.

A neat and self-contained system. Some would argue it is very abstract, especially sans political parties as was initially planned. While true, abstraction isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially in a game that spans a hundred years across the entire globe. Abstraction is good as long as we know what is being abstracted "power and influence" are somewhat abstract concepts by themselves, but we all know what they mean on some level. Even in a democracy where everyone has the same number of votes, a wealthier man will have more ways to influence things than a poor man. The media and the bureaucracy can make and unmake politicians. People can be bribed, threatened, extorted, convinced, lobbied, blackmailed, you name it.

While a system representing all nuances of electoral politics from seat numbers, the upper and lower houses, cabinet picks all the way down to voting laws would feel and look very immersive. This system would almost certainly put too much stress on it and ignore many other aspects of power, which are nigh impossible to represent separately, but which can be abstracted behind the clout system. While we can still name them and know what they are and what the mechanic is going for.

With this in mind. What exactly *happens when an interest group is appointed to the government? It could mean the monarch appoints a series of pro-interest-group ministers. Sure, why no - one way an interest group can exert power over the government. But it could very well mean their supporters are appointed into key posts in the bureaucracy, as political advisors, employ media pressure or any other of the myriad of ways they could get their way (refer to the earlier list). The definition of "in government" is fluid enough to possibly include the actual elected set of ministers, court cliques, shadowy conspiracies and everything in-between.

But in this dev diary, it is very heavily implied that an interest group "in government" in a democracy always means the elected government of party-affiliated government ministers. This produces a problem whereby the part with the minority of votes with on-average wealthier and more influential supporters can still be the more legitimate government. It means that the Military, having not run in the election at all but remaining influential, be suddenly appointed to the government in a parliamentary democracy. How? In the previous dev diary, the example was raised of the US Green party, having received 1% of the vote, could still be appointed into the actual government. The implied way this could happen is that a powerful Green lobby (more powerful than the mere 1% election results would suggest) could still skillfully manipulate things behind the scenes to get its policies through. This is highly unlikely and would tank government legitimacy (as little unpopular unelected bureaucratic cliques tend to do), but it makes some narrative sense. But now we are let to believe the player could just make all the secretaries green party supporters and then wait for the inevitable revolution? It would never get that far.

Anyway. Why do I believe the Interest groups should operate independently across party lines after the election? Imagine this situation: The Industrialists' favoured party has lost the election, oh no! But representatives of the opposition realise that they actually share quite a few ideas with the Industrialists anyway and want to have them around. However, at the meeting, the representative of Industrialists(.tm) tells them: Sorry, we care more about the sanctity of party lines than getting our interests through. This should work this way. Political parties ought to be a vehicle through which Interest groups try to push through their polities. They shouldn't stay wedded to them if this fails and another opportunity arises. How would this look in practice? Perhaps the industrialist wing of the opposition party votes with the government this quarter - Perhaps the industrialists use their media apparatus to boost government legitimacy. Maybe they have connections in the bureaucracy, or they find a man avowedly of the opposition who nevertheless shares their views and gets him as their man in the new government. They still have influence from other sources besides the election, so who they support in the election shouldn't limit how they decide to dispose of it.

So, yes. I do hope Paradox will reconsider this decision. I do think the system has potential, though. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

PS: Did you know that before the start of this sentence, the text had exactly 1000 words? I'd call it "The one thousand words" petition after an event from Czech history known as "The two thousand words" petition but that'd be a bit pretentious of me.
 
Last edited:
  • 8
  • 6
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Seems interesting enough. I was skeptical of the need for political parties at all, they seemed like a thing that the forums demanded to have because they liked the name and there's worship of V2 (which had them) but didn't have much of a home in V3. You can see how many people aren't clear on what political parties should do in a given situation or how they should be implemented because ultimately I think most people like having a mechanic named political parties more than they have a firm idea of what a political party ought to actually do.

But hey, we'll give this a shot. I think, from my read on it, that the biggest thing they can offer is to be the inciting event for a government change. When IG A and IG B are in a shared party but disagree on item P on the agenda, and the party falls apart, it's a good chance for things to start coming apart at the seams because you're locked into a particular group of IG. The party falls apart, the government is up for grabs, nobody's got their hand on the wheel, etc. Whereas before, it looked like carefully managing any single IG at a time could have resulted in more stable governments by being able to very selectively pick IG to sideline or incorporate, this ties the player's hands a bit more. So I'm still sort of basically skeptical that they're needed but willing to give them a shot. It's definitely better than I expected back when people first started clamoring for them.

Will parties be able to form coalitions in cases where no party wins an election? Or do you just get a minority government?
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
In constitutional countries, political parties fight and debate in the parliament, and members of political parties form cabinet members, which can be a coalition government or a separate government. The ruling party and cabinet members exert corresponding influence on national policies and laws, which I think is the real connotation of political party system.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I don't know if anyone has asked this already, but will electoral systems be modeled and influence how many parties form? For example, will first-past-the-post systems tend to have fewer parties than proportional systems? Seeing America with more than 2 major parties in 1900 would be kind of weird.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Is there a priority order to which parties get founded? For example, if I switch to a democracy and my two most powerful interest groups are the clergy and the armed forces, will I get a religious party and a military party and other IGs gather around those, or is there a bias towards liberal/conservative type parties?
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I looked forward at being creative with these interest groups, in forming interesting governments, but that will be harder when the IG's move as a bloc .... There will be less options to create interesting governments now.

Suggestion: Two or more IG's being part of a political party should merely give a bonus to 'political clout' to both parties. So when two IG's who are in the same party are in the government, they are more powerful than when they are in the government on their own. But it's always an option to move one or more IG's in the government and leave other(s) of the same party in the opposition, if that's worth it in some situations.

Likewise: If two or more IG's of the same party are in the opposition, there would be mechanic that those IG's are way more powerful/dangerous. So it's more interesting to move one IG from an opposition party to your government to break their power.

BTW: By implementing it this way you could also have IG"s who are in two or more political parties. Would be interesting to have a Catholic Party with the Devout IG and for instance the Rural Folk and a Protestant Party with the Devout IG and the Petite Bourgeoisie if you play a nation with both Catholics and Protestants.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Another suggestion: Your electoral system could determine the behaviour of your parties.

Like:

  • First-past-the-post: It's more likely that parties will have a relatively large number of Interest Groups (3-5), but it will be less likely new parties might emerge. (like the US or the UK). The Rural Folk might prefer this system because it's more inclusive towards remote rural regions in your country. Ruling parties might get a bonus during elections due to gerrymandering.
  • Proportional: The average number of IG's in a party will stay relatively low (1-3), but new parties will be more likely (like the Netherlands or Sweden). The Intelligentsia might prefer this system, because it feels often more fair to have 'one man, one vote'.
  • Mixed: The default settings.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
neondt said:
The following Parties can emerge throughout the course of the game:​
  • The Agrarian Party
  • The Anarchist Society
  • The Communist Party
  • The Conservative Party
  • The Fascist Party
  • The Free Trade Party
  • The Liberal Party
  • The Military Party
  • The Radical Party
  • The Religious Party
  • The Social Democratic Party
Click to expand...
1652425530937.png
 
Last edited:
  • 7Haha
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Claudius84 said:
Another suggestion: Your electoral system could determine the behaviour of your parties.

Like:

  • First-past-the-post: It's more likely that parties will get very large, but it will be less likely new parties might emerge. (like the US or the UK). The Rural Folk might prefer this system because it's more inclusive towards remote rural regions in your country. Ruling parties might get a bonus during elections due to gerrymandering.
Click to expand...
New parties can, and did emerge, but the only stable state permitted by fptp is a 2 party system. So you can have new parties coming up but they either fizzle out quickly or replace an old party permanently.
Claudius84 said:
  • Proportional: Parties will stay relatively small, but new parties will be more likely (like the Netherlands or Sweden). The Intelligentsia might prefer this system, because it feels often more fair to have 'one man, one vote'.
  • Mixed: The default settings.
Click to expand...
I'd also like some "no minimum support" that would be like interwar germany, with many splinter and local parties existing. But I guess that wouldn't make sense as long parties are defined as groups of IGs.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
MfgLuckbot said:
I'd also like some "no minimum support" that would be like interwar germany, with many splinter and local parties existing. But I guess that wouldn't make sense as long parties are defined as groups of IGs.
Click to expand...
Mmmmm maybe .... Some IG's could not be in a specific party, but in an abstract 'Multiple Minor Parties' category. They are organized in parties, but the parties are not relevant enough (yet) to mention.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
EwaldvonKleist said:
What about a monarchist/reactionary party?
Click to expand...
Monarchists can be every party that support monachism over republicanism. Pretty sure in the UK a lot of the parties will be Pro-Monarchists and only fe of them Pro-Republicanist. On the USA on the other hand, every party will be Pro-Republicanism. A party solely based on onarchism or reactionism doesn't make sense, because it depends on the countries. In some countries the Agrarian Party can be Monarchists, in other countries they would be more leftist etc.

And a reactionary party absolutelly doesn't make much sense. That's more of a ideology inside a party too. There might be a reactionary military party or in some countries a reactionary religious party etc
 
  • 3
  • 3
Reactions:
why is there no nationalist/patriotic generic party or socialist generic party? where would the pan-nationalist movements in colonized world be? where would pan-arab movements like baath and nassarists be? or kemalists in turkey? (i hope you dont adopt a eurocentric view and just make them all fascists)

aslo, can a party split into several parties? would be cool if they could.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
I really love the fact that industrialists are supporting the conservatives if we have healthcare and lower strata voting.
This is an accurate description.
You only support the liberal idea of expanding the rights of persons, until you have what you want, after that you tend to be happy with the status quo and ready to defend it.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back